Legal Opinion

Smith-Douglass Co. v. . Honeycutt

Supreme Court of North Carolina

Decided February 22, 1933PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, J.

In all cases other than those which are recognized as local (C. S., 463, 464) the action must be tried in the county in which the plaintiffs or the defendants, or any of them, reside at its commencement. C. S., 469. Whitford v. Ins. Co., 156 N. C., 42. This action was instituted in Pasquotank; the defendants reside in Johnston. The plaintiff is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Virginia and has designated Pasquotank County as the place of its principal office in North Carolina. It is provided that for the purpose of suing and being sued the principal place of business of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Harrison v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1914
  2. Southern Railway Co. v. AllisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  3. Allison v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1901
  4. Whitford v. North State Life InsuranceSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1911
  5. Farmers' State Alliance v. MurrellSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1896

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Crain and Denbo, Inc. v. Harris & Harris Const. Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1959
  2. Noland Company v. Laxton Construction CompanySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1956
  3. Carolina Mortgage Co. v. LongSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1934
  4. Hill v. Atlantic Greyhound Corp.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1949
  5. John P. Nutt Corp. v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1938

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API